MedElevator
Войти в исследования Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
Real-world nausea/vomiting control during anticancer therapy: a cross-sectional survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Peng Wanqiu, Wang Hao, He Changding
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To characterize real-world antiemetic prescribing, nausea/vomiting control, and implementation gaps in supportive care during anticancer therapy.
METHODS: We analyzed 624 anonymized physician-completed questionnaire records. Anticancer regimens were mapped to NCCN Antiemesis Version 2.2023 emetic-risk categories using the highest-risk principle. Because dose, agent, timing, and delayed-phase continuation were not uniformly captured, guideline implementation was assessed using prespecified medication-class proxies based on the first antiemetic regimen.
RESULTS: High- and moderate-emetic-risk regimens accounted for 389/624 (62.3%) and 150/624 (24.0%) records, respectively. Acute nausea (330/624, 52.9%) and delayed nausea (238/624, 38.1%) were more common than vomiting. Residual nausea persisted in 143/624 (22.9%) records after antiemetic treatment. Initial regimens were predominantly 5-HT3 receptor antagonist-based (555/624, 88.9%). Among HEC/MEC-classifiable records, the core class-level concordance was met in 188/539 (34.9%), and the four-class documentation proxy for HEC was observed in only 8/389 (2.1%). In multivariable analysis, meeting the core proxy was not significantly associated with fewer residual symptoms (adjusted OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.88-2.23), whereas prior CINV was independently associated with residual symptoms (adjusted OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.18).
CONCLUSION: Antiemetic use was common, yet nausea, particularly delayed and residual nausea, remained frequent, and risk-adapted multidrug prophylaxis for high-risk therapy was incompletely implemented. Improving care will require separate assessment of nausea, appropriate prophylaxis throughout the emetic-risk window, and reassessment across treatment cycles that considers prior CINV, tolerability, adherence, and affordability.
METHODS: We analyzed 624 anonymized physician-completed questionnaire records. Anticancer regimens were mapped to NCCN Antiemesis Version 2.2023 emetic-risk categories using the highest-risk principle. Because dose, agent, timing, and delayed-phase continuation were not uniformly captured, guideline implementation was assessed using prespecified medication-class proxies based on the first antiemetic regimen.
RESULTS: High- and moderate-emetic-risk regimens accounted for 389/624 (62.3%) and 150/624 (24.0%) records, respectively. Acute nausea (330/624, 52.9%) and delayed nausea (238/624, 38.1%) were more common than vomiting. Residual nausea persisted in 143/624 (22.9%) records after antiemetic treatment. Initial regimens were predominantly 5-HT3 receptor antagonist-based (555/624, 88.9%). Among HEC/MEC-classifiable records, the core class-level concordance was met in 188/539 (34.9%), and the four-class documentation proxy for HEC was observed in only 8/389 (2.1%). In multivariable analysis, meeting the core proxy was not significantly associated with fewer residual symptoms (adjusted OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.88-2.23), whereas prior CINV was independently associated with residual symptoms (adjusted OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.18).
CONCLUSION: Antiemetic use was common, yet nausea, particularly delayed and residual nausea, remained frequent, and risk-adapted multidrug prophylaxis for high-risk therapy was incompletely implemented. Improving care will require separate assessment of nausea, appropriate prophylaxis throughout the emetic-risk window, and reassessment across treatment cycles that considers prior CINV, tolerability, adherence, and affordability.